Why does the government insist on meddling with business? Since when did the Government know anything about running a business? They are the most inefficient entity on the planet. I have always said the only monopoly around is the Government.

They insist this Microsoft ruling is for the benefit of the consumer. You want to do something for the consumer then lower taxes or get after OPEC.

They went after Intel. They are after Cisco. They are in the proccess of killing the Gun Manufacturing Industry. They destroyed RJ Reynolds. Who is next? Why have they not gone after the Post Office? I always thought the Post Office is a monopoly.

First this administration and their comments tanked the Biotech's. Now their cronies are after Technology. How much more damage are they going to do?

One more point. No One, No One, ever, ever wins agianst the Government...Sad but true. Not even big Tabbaco and Gun manufacturers have a chance ( and we know how powerful they were).

I have a bad feeling for Microsoft. In the end they will be hurt. The Government will make sure of that.

Also, if Intel had not settled do you think they would be in the position they are in today?

Yes.The settlement was essentially a clarification of what was and was not legal for them to do.

If Intel had gone through trial what they were accused of was on shaky enough legal ground that it could have gone either way. Even had it gone against them it would have been a rather minor infraction of the law. (ie. jay-walking across a street where there is no crosswalk as compared to running a red light at 100MPH in a car)

Do you feel that companies who are very successful are not threatened by today's actions?

Only those who are monopolies (or near monopolies) and perform anti-competitive acts are threatened by today's actions.

Government needs to stay out of the Technology Industry and leave successful companies alone.

Government needs to apply rules fairly and equally.And from my vantage, it appears that they are.Technology industry and successful companies should not get special dispensation to break the law.

I would hope that you could see through the smoke and realize this is nothing more then meddling.

Most of the smoke I've been seeing has been Microsoft PR trying to hide the facts.

The only folks that think this is fair are Microsoft's competition

So far it looks fair to me, and I'm not a competitor of Microsoft, nor employed by one, so I guess your statement is wrong.

I'm just your ordinary Joe Consumer who is unhappy with BSoD and other problems I experience regularly when using Windows, and unhappy with the heavy handed tactics that Microsoft has used that have hurt companies that could have potentially provided useful tools/services to me.

>>> Why have they not gone after the Post Office? I always thought the Post Office is a monopoly.

Not only do they not go after the Post Office, the government regularly entertains and enacts legislation that specifically restrains competitors. The Post Office and the Federal government have been working very diligently for several years to make it nearly impossible for companies like Mail Boxes Etc. to do business, while regularly subsidizing Post Office operations in various ways to keep them competitive.

Even better, the government has recently entertained several pieces of legislation that attempt to penalize the consumer for using competitors, using the excuse that some consumers use these alternatives for the purpose of committing fraud. [lol] Ignoring, of course, the fact that the Postal Service is the most common vehicle of consumer and commercial fraud in existence.

The government isn't interested in protecting the consumer, encouraging trade and business, or containing monopolies. The government is interested in control, period, end of discussion. Politicians want power, and they want it at the expense of their constituents and at the expense of the companies who foot the bill for that power to exist.

That's my biggest objection to this Microsoft mess - done with the excuse of benefitting the consumer, the truth is that it's going to cost us all money, in a myriad of ways, while giving the government the excuse it needs to interfere in business yet again.

In the long term, we all know that government intervention in private business is doomed to failure, because the government simply isn't competent to perform the tasks they're assigned under the Constitution, much less to control a private business. And we end up paying the bill, both as consumers and as taxpayers, without getting any of the so-called benefits we're promised.

They insist this Microsoft ruling is for the benefit of the consumer. You want to do something for the consumer then lower taxes or get after OPEC.

Well, last I saw, the Energy Secretary and the Secretary of State were trying to get OPEC to pump more oil. You do realize, though, that the ability of the United States gonverment to influence foreign countries to pump more oil is necessarily more limited than their jurisdiction within their borders.

They went after Intel.

And Intel settled quickly, without getting into a painful court case. Smart of them.

They are after Cisco

Not that I'm aware of.

Why have they not gone after the Post Office? I always thought the Post Office is a monopoly.

But its a monopoly explicitly allowed under the Constitution.

First this administration and their comments tanked the Biotech's.

What tanked the Biotechs was wild speculation which drove prices up nearly 10-fold in 4-5 months.

Now their cronies are after Technology. How much more damage are they going to do?

Well, the Biotechs are up nearly 2-3 fold since November. Even technology is way up. Doesn't look that damaging to me.

One more point. No One, No One, ever, ever wins agianst the Government

Demonstrably false. I won a case in traffic court (over a ticket) just the other day :-).

"First of all, Yes I understand that the comments of this Administration on Biotech's was nothing knew but tell that to the 1000's of investors that bailed. "

So if Bill Clinton gets up tomorrow and announces that Al Gore is running for president, and MSFT investors dump the stock because they though George Bush was running uncontested and was sure to drop the current lawsuit, you blame Clinton and not the shareholders? Beyond bizarre.

"Also, if Intel had not settled do you think they would be in the position they are in today? Do you feel that companies who are very successful are not threatened by today's actions? "

The Intel settlement shows that the DOJ and FTC are not, as some have tried to suggest, a threat to every successful company. Take a look at the overall action of the current antitrust division. They have approved some *huge* mergers. I don't think they're being overly aggressive.

If the FTC and DOJ are really so unreasonable, how come they managed to reach a settlement with Intel?

True, but that doesn't necessarily make it right or good, despite what all the strict interpreters might claim.

I've yet to see a good justification for this monopoly. The only thing I see offered is that the post office gives same-price service to the entire country. But I see no reason they couldn't open it up and allow *multiple* companies to provide that service, still keeping the requirement that each company had to provide same-price service.

Maybe an old justification back in the late 1700s would have had something to do with the essential nature of mail communication. But today, the post office is less essential to our communication than are telephone lines and internet wires, and we certainly don't have government monopolies on those.

<<...Not only do they not go after the Post Office, the government regularly entertains and enacts legislation that specifically restrains competitors. The Post Office and the Federal government have been working very diligently for several years to make it nearly impossible for companies like Mail Boxes Etc. to do business, while regularly subsidizing Post Office operations in various ways to keep them competitive....>>

Steph, thank you for bringing up MBE. I have friends (they are married) that own two MBE stores, their franchise, and to who I provide PC help. You are absolutely correct about what the USPS is doing to squeeze MBE. My friends and the other MBE owners are hopping mad about being squeezed by the USPS and it is a perfect example that you cite. The USPS is worried about fraud coming from MBE and other Mom and Pop operations but what about the majority of fraud coming from the post office boxes in the post offices? Ever see the Terry Gilliam movie Brazil, that's what our United Socialist States of America is becoming.

>>> Steph, thank you for bringing up MBE. I have friends (they are married) that own two MBE stores, their franchise, and to who I provide PC help. You are absolutely correct about what the USPS is doing to squeeze MBE. My friends and the other MBE owners are hopping mad about being squeezed by the USPS and it is a perfect example that you cite. The USPS is worried about fraud coming from MBE and other Mom and Pop operations but what about the majority of fraud coming from the post office boxes in the post offices? Ever see the Terry Gilliam movie Brazil, that's what our United Socialist States of America is becoming.

Working as a consultant, I travel frequently and for long periods of time, so MBE and places like it are absolutely essential for my business and personal life. Without an MBE, I'd have to foot the bill for a secretary I can't afford.

Worse, the Postal Service can't be trusted to deliver service. Mail forwarding is irregular or simply not done. It's not uncommon for the wrong mail to be delivered to me, or for my mail to be delivered elsewhere. I just don't have the time to deal with that kind of incompetence. There aren't enough hours in the day.

MBE doesn't solve all my problems, but they're dependable, competent, and exactly the service I need for the business I do.

So, it infuriates me when the Postal Service persecutes them. It's a clear case, too, with the restrictions and attempts to impede their ability to do business. The Postal Service simply can't compete, so they cheat by using the government to keep the competitors from being competitive.